Telecommunications Employees Association of Manitoba Inc. v. Manitoba Telecom Services

Telecommunications Employees Association of Manitoba Inc. v. Manitoba Telecom Services

The motion was dismissed because it would be inequitable and contrary to the proper exercise of discretion to apply res judicata or bar complainants from challenging the discrimination aspects where the Union, which controlled the grievance process, deliberately limited arbitration scope; the Union has standing under s.40 to pursue systemic remedies; there is no need to add the Union as a respondent; and Hando is not automatically barred by withdrawal of his grievance.

Citation
2007 CHRT 26
Parties
Complainant: Telecommunications Employees Association of Manitoba Inc.; Complainant: Barbara Custance; Complainant: Carmen Giroux; Complainant: Chuck Hando; Complainant: Kathleen Mulligan; Complainant: Janice Sirett; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Manitoba Telecom Services
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Ruling on Preliminary Motion
Outcome
Motion of respondent Manitoba Telecom Services dismissed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Abuse of Process, Union Standing, Arbitration, Collective Bargaining, Remedies
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Administrative Law Res Judicata Abuse of Process Union Standing Arbitration Collective Bargaining +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Telecommunications Employees Association of Manitoba Inc.

Complainant

Barbara Custance

Complainant

Carmen Giroux

Complainant

Chuck Hando

Complainant

Kathleen Mulligan

Complainant

Janice Sirett

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Manitoba Telecom Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act / Ruling on Preliminary Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether findings of a prior arbitration (Graham Award) bind the Tribunal and bar re-litigation of the lay-off comparative analysis
  2. 2 Whether individual complainant Hando is barred from Tribunal proceedings for withdrawing a grievance
  3. 3 Whether the Union should be added as a respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The motion was dismissed because it would be inequitable and contrary to the proper exercise of discretion to apply res judicata or bar complainants from challenging the discrimination aspects where the Union, which controlled the grievance process, deliberately limited arbitration scope; the Union has standing under s.40 to pursue systemic remedies; there is no need to add the Union as a respondent; and Hando is not automatically barred by withdrawal of his grievance.

Court Disposition

Motion of respondent Manitoba Telecom Services dismissed

Orders

  • Respondent MTS motion dismissed.
  • Any costs relating to the motion to be dealt with, if necessary, by the Tribunal hearing the complaints.